Bad Boy
2004-04-17 21:27:31 UTC
Only if the Malaysian missile is carrying a nuclear warhead.
Would Malaysia want to start a nuclear war ?
If it was carrying a conventional war head, then it is possible
that in a few hours half of the Malaysian peninsula will be
overrun by half a million highly trained troops from Singapore.
It is wrong to think that Singapore is a weak small red dot,
a fortress of riches to be attacked and plundered.
No. Singapore is a giant, a professional army in civilian cloth.
Singapore is deadly but friendly. Very deadly to its enemy
but friendly to its peaceful neighbours.
Bad boy.
Would Malaysia want to start a nuclear war ?
If it was carrying a conventional war head, then it is possible
that in a few hours half of the Malaysian peninsula will be
overrun by half a million highly trained troops from Singapore.
It is wrong to think that Singapore is a weak small red dot,
a fortress of riches to be attacked and plundered.
No. Singapore is a giant, a professional army in civilian cloth.
Singapore is deadly but friendly. Very deadly to its enemy
but friendly to its peaceful neighbours.
Bad boy.
Anyway, I looked at him incredously and burst out laughing... and told
him, all Malaysia needs is to land one, just one missile inside the
red-dot... and half the nation is GONE!!
This is a 'country' that an airplane comes into land, even with the
landing gear out, it's still in Malaysian territory...
This is a 'country' that can put-up two mobile communication towers (for
redundancy) and have "Nationwide coverage"...
This is a 'country' that is a red-dot that if you organize a marathon
race, the route will have covered the nation...
Ha, ha, ha...
thanks.
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
him, all Malaysia needs is to land one, just one missile inside the
red-dot... and half the nation is GONE!!
This is a 'country' that an airplane comes into land, even with the
landing gear out, it's still in Malaysian territory...
This is a 'country' that can put-up two mobile communication towers (for
redundancy) and have "Nationwide coverage"...
This is a 'country' that is a red-dot that if you organize a marathon
race, the route will have covered the nation...
Ha, ha, ha...
thanks.
From Singapore Straits Times
16 April 2004
You'd be mad to test the Singapore fortress
By Anthony Paul
SINGAPORE has a poorly kept military secret, if the city's taxi
drivers, who often double as driving-seat generals, are to be
believed. A visitor taking a taxi from Changi Airport will sometimes
be told the inside story.
About three minutes past the 'Welcome to Singapore' sign and tree
cover, the road suddenly becomes a perfectly straight stretch of
several kilometres. In the median strip to your right, low shrubs in
large pots have replaced the trees.
If war threatens, you're told, Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) personnel
will descend and drag those pots clear.
The squads will simultaneously topple palm trees lining the road and
dismantle a parallel line of lamp-posts. Within minutes, Changi will
have an additional runway for SAF jets.
Foreign Policy magazine's annual globalisation index recently named
Singapore Asia's most globalised country - the most open to visitors,
trade and capital flow. But this openness obscures another of the
city-state's distinctions - Singapore is one of the world's
best-prepared fortresses.
Defence spending per capita compares with such places as Israel and
Kuwait. Sudden mobilisations periodically prove Singapore's claim that
at the press of a button, the SAF can field more than a quarter of a
million men within hours. As British defence specialist Tim Huxley has
written in Defending The Lion City, Singapore is 'probably the most
densely defended state in the world'.
Why so much defence for such a small state?
One obvious response is the island's strategic position, on the main
route for vast East Asia-Europe sea traffic.
But another compelling reason is this unusual state's ambition.
Within 10 years, says Asian Demographics, a marketing consultancy, the
republic can expect to be Asia's second-richest nation, with a gross
domestic product per capita of US$35,020 (S$58,900). (Other forecasts
for year 2013: Japan, US$38,987; Hong Kong, US$29,902; Australia,
US$22,961; Malaysia, US$5,394.)
To sustain the growth rate needed, Singapore must continue attracting
investment and skilled immigrants. Unfortunately, Singapore is 'a fine
place in a lousy neighbourhood', said a former DBS Bank economist.
'Though there are no immediate threats, being seen to be able to
defend ourselves against any bully is important to investors.'
Threat perceptions in Singapore include Malaysia, Indonesia and,
lately, terrorists. Further complicating defence issues are those two
larger neighbours' Chinese minorities. They tend to look upon
predominantly Chinese Singapore as an ultimate refuge.
When mobs began rampaging through Indonesia's Chinese communities in
1998, Singapore feared it might become the destination for literally
hundreds of thousands of Sino-Indonesians. The threat failed to
materialise, but not before the SAF began extensive preparations to
ward off any unacceptably large influx.
Meantime, Singapore continues its up-and-down relationship with
Malaysia, which supplies close to half the island's water. Singapore's
resultant sensitivity about water security is evident in a passage in
From Third World To First, Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew's memoirs.
In a blunt conversation with then Malaysian prime minister Mahathir
Mohamad, Mr Lee noted that Malaysia had guaranteed Singapore's water
supply. But if that guarantee were ever breached in 'a random act of
madness', he told Dr Mahathir, 'we would have to go in, forcibly if
need be, to restore the water flow'.
Prospects of such an armed conflict are extremely remote. But this
past weekend, war caught my attention - dramatic TV reports from Iraq
and a Sunday Times article on Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean's concept
of 'the new type of soldier needed by the 'third-generation SAF' '.
Later in the morning, I visited the Fort Canning bunker. In the fort
commander's conference room, I watched wax images of British generals
re-enacting Singapore's 1942 surrender to the Japanese as the island
ran out of water and fuel.
I asked myself: For all Singapore's chutzpah, what really would be the
SAF's chances if war came?
Though clearly impressed by the SAF, author Huxley judges it to be
largely a citizen force, 'dependent for its personnel on essentially
acquiescent rather than enthusiastic conscripts and reservists'. The
fact that they have never been battle-tested, says Mr Huxley, leaves
us with the question: Are SAF personnel really warriors - or just
bureaucrats in uniform?
We won't really know until there really is a war.
But as a former war correspondent (Indochina, the Soviet-Afghan war),
Motivation in combat: The slogan of the US Military Academy at West
Point is 'Duty, Honour, Country'. The word sequence, with 'duty'
first, wasn't chosen idly. Surveys during the Vietnam war showed the
main source of battlefield courage was not so much the official
propaganda ('save the world from communism') or even patriotism. It
was duty to closest comrades, beginning with the squad and platoon.
SAF reserve units are more tightly bonded than any I have seen. I know
of one Beach Road IT company whose ethnically mixed staff were in the
same university sports team and are today the core of their reserve
unit.
What I saw in Vietnam leaves me with no doubt that duty to comrades
who are also their close friends will make their unit more than
formidable under fire.
Combat history: Happily brief. But it may be worth noting in the SAF's
only combat to date - the storming of a hijacked airliner at Changi in
1991 - its well-trained commandos shot dead all four Pakistani
terrorists within 30 seconds of entering the passenger cabin.
If I were someone looking for a serious fight with Singapore, I'd
ponder the two points above. The SAF gives the impression that it
would indeed be madness to test its preparedness.
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/
--16 April 2004
You'd be mad to test the Singapore fortress
By Anthony Paul
SINGAPORE has a poorly kept military secret, if the city's taxi
drivers, who often double as driving-seat generals, are to be
believed. A visitor taking a taxi from Changi Airport will sometimes
be told the inside story.
About three minutes past the 'Welcome to Singapore' sign and tree
cover, the road suddenly becomes a perfectly straight stretch of
several kilometres. In the median strip to your right, low shrubs in
large pots have replaced the trees.
If war threatens, you're told, Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) personnel
will descend and drag those pots clear.
The squads will simultaneously topple palm trees lining the road and
dismantle a parallel line of lamp-posts. Within minutes, Changi will
have an additional runway for SAF jets.
Foreign Policy magazine's annual globalisation index recently named
Singapore Asia's most globalised country - the most open to visitors,
trade and capital flow. But this openness obscures another of the
city-state's distinctions - Singapore is one of the world's
best-prepared fortresses.
Defence spending per capita compares with such places as Israel and
Kuwait. Sudden mobilisations periodically prove Singapore's claim that
at the press of a button, the SAF can field more than a quarter of a
million men within hours. As British defence specialist Tim Huxley has
written in Defending The Lion City, Singapore is 'probably the most
densely defended state in the world'.
Why so much defence for such a small state?
One obvious response is the island's strategic position, on the main
route for vast East Asia-Europe sea traffic.
But another compelling reason is this unusual state's ambition.
Within 10 years, says Asian Demographics, a marketing consultancy, the
republic can expect to be Asia's second-richest nation, with a gross
domestic product per capita of US$35,020 (S$58,900). (Other forecasts
for year 2013: Japan, US$38,987; Hong Kong, US$29,902; Australia,
US$22,961; Malaysia, US$5,394.)
To sustain the growth rate needed, Singapore must continue attracting
investment and skilled immigrants. Unfortunately, Singapore is 'a fine
place in a lousy neighbourhood', said a former DBS Bank economist.
'Though there are no immediate threats, being seen to be able to
defend ourselves against any bully is important to investors.'
Threat perceptions in Singapore include Malaysia, Indonesia and,
lately, terrorists. Further complicating defence issues are those two
larger neighbours' Chinese minorities. They tend to look upon
predominantly Chinese Singapore as an ultimate refuge.
When mobs began rampaging through Indonesia's Chinese communities in
1998, Singapore feared it might become the destination for literally
hundreds of thousands of Sino-Indonesians. The threat failed to
materialise, but not before the SAF began extensive preparations to
ward off any unacceptably large influx.
Meantime, Singapore continues its up-and-down relationship with
Malaysia, which supplies close to half the island's water. Singapore's
resultant sensitivity about water security is evident in a passage in
From Third World To First, Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew's memoirs.
In a blunt conversation with then Malaysian prime minister Mahathir
Mohamad, Mr Lee noted that Malaysia had guaranteed Singapore's water
supply. But if that guarantee were ever breached in 'a random act of
madness', he told Dr Mahathir, 'we would have to go in, forcibly if
need be, to restore the water flow'.
Prospects of such an armed conflict are extremely remote. But this
past weekend, war caught my attention - dramatic TV reports from Iraq
and a Sunday Times article on Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean's concept
of 'the new type of soldier needed by the 'third-generation SAF' '.
Later in the morning, I visited the Fort Canning bunker. In the fort
commander's conference room, I watched wax images of British generals
re-enacting Singapore's 1942 surrender to the Japanese as the island
ran out of water and fuel.
I asked myself: For all Singapore's chutzpah, what really would be the
SAF's chances if war came?
Though clearly impressed by the SAF, author Huxley judges it to be
largely a citizen force, 'dependent for its personnel on essentially
acquiescent rather than enthusiastic conscripts and reservists'. The
fact that they have never been battle-tested, says Mr Huxley, leaves
us with the question: Are SAF personnel really warriors - or just
bureaucrats in uniform?
We won't really know until there really is a war.
But as a former war correspondent (Indochina, the Soviet-Afghan war),
Motivation in combat: The slogan of the US Military Academy at West
Point is 'Duty, Honour, Country'. The word sequence, with 'duty'
first, wasn't chosen idly. Surveys during the Vietnam war showed the
main source of battlefield courage was not so much the official
propaganda ('save the world from communism') or even patriotism. It
was duty to closest comrades, beginning with the squad and platoon.
SAF reserve units are more tightly bonded than any I have seen. I know
of one Beach Road IT company whose ethnically mixed staff were in the
same university sports team and are today the core of their reserve
unit.
What I saw in Vietnam leaves me with no doubt that duty to comrades
who are also their close friends will make their unit more than
formidable under fire.
Combat history: Happily brief. But it may be worth noting in the SAF's
only combat to date - the storming of a hijacked airliner at Changi in
1991 - its well-trained commandos shot dead all four Pakistani
terrorists within 30 seconds of entering the passenger cabin.
If I were someone looking for a serious fight with Singapore, I'd
ponder the two points above. The SAF gives the impression that it
would indeed be madness to test its preparedness.
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/